Project Reality Forums

Well the scout helicopter would need something to take out the armour..

sylent/shooter wrote:Well the scout helicopter would need something to take out the armour..

It had laser guided missiles

I didn't believe that the Gazelle did.. then again haven't used that one in forever

Cassius wrote:but it does require head skills.

Everything needs "head skills" in the first place, your point is moot. I want this so it's not a game of luck over who locks first and the missile hits. There's already jets for that.

The only occasions where I've seen and experienced good fights between attack helicopters were on the very very rare times where both choppers AA missiles missed or had already been used and they/we resorted to dodging eachother and trying to hit with rockets and have our gunners shoot eachother.

Not counting those awesome rare occasions it's always just the shitty dump flares - wait for lock - press button - enemy chopper dead.

Stealthgato wrote:Not counting those awesome rare occasions it's always just the shitty dump flares - wait for lock - press button - enemy chopper dead.

So you're entire argument stems from the fact that you want it to be more interesting and fun? Because that is how I see this. If thats the case then there really is no argument

sylent/shooter wrote:So you're entire argument stems from the fact that you want it to be more interesting and fun? Because that is how I see this. If thats the case then there really is no argument

If you think about it, this is supposed to be fun, not just a one lock fire boom kind of thing, it's unrealistic and it's pretty boring.

Well I think that it is pretty realistic to fire and forget. As for being fun, it really isn't that big of a deal. It's fun for the team that wins. Sure The crew that dies it isn't fun but it's just the same as if they got killed by mobile AA. It isn't fun then. I say the crew that won it's fun because then they can go on and continue to help the team (more fun).

It's an arcade MilSim is how I describe PR.

At first the AA does seem to be 50/50 but if you fly enough and get used to it, you can up the odds of surviving quite a bit heli to heli, from my experience anyway.

Its a combination of tactics (you don?t always have to be the highest to win but it is a great help), being lightning fast with reactions on the flare button (that means keeping a finger above it all the time so the split second you hear the lock you can release them) and getting a feel for it overall.

Its also about tricking the enemy, some people you can scare off just by firing a missile before even locking.

Of course if two equally experienced pilots meet then its more like 50/50 but then it would be with anything.

I don?t think AA needs to be removed because I don?t think it will improve anything, in fact, it just means you need to get even higher because you can?t fire hydras or cannon up like you can an AA missile.

But if they were to be removed then perhaps instead of jets dedicated AA helicopters would be a better idea (and I think for a conventional scenario not as unrealistic as it sounds).

Best option though is asymmetric warfare so only one side has air.

Ohhh look who it is! WB Alex

Would having each side with AAM-less helicopters, and an AAM only fighter be realistic? I think it's a little silly to make it so that no air vehicle has AAMs.

Maps like kashan, iron eagle, etc. it wouldnt take much to do this. Burning sands, shijia would require an airstrip, however.

40mmrain wrote:Would having each side with AAM-less helicopters, and an AAM only fighter be realistic? I think it's a little silly to make it so that no air vehicle has AAMs.

Maps like kashan, iron eagle, etc. it wouldnt take much to do this. Burning sands, shijia would require an airstrip, however.

Why do more work to the map's when you can just remove the missiles?

SuperHornet wrote:Why do more work to the map's when you can just remove the missiles?

realism

Both the Gazelle and the Kiowa has Hellfire/ATGM-missiles. These can be used to take out armor.

Also, the term 'Gameplay > Realism' is really important to remember, guys. Not having AAMs on attack-helicopters might seem unrealistic, but it might improve gameplay.

saXoni wrote:Both the Gazelle and the Kiowa has Hellfire/ATGM-missiles. These can be used to take out armor.

Also, the term 'Gameplay > Realism' is really important to remember, guys. Not having AAMs on attack-helicopters might seem unrealistic, but it might improve gameplay.

Exactly. How many times have you heard this?

"CAS, I have a laze for you."
"Not now, hunting enemy helos"
**15 minutes later**
"Ok, CAS is ready for your laze"

I have said that and had that said to me on multiple occasions.

This mod is a combination of teamwork and realism, correct? If so, then I would say that the teamwork in this case is more important. Because how many times have you heard of helicopters in real life going for the enemy helicopters before taking CAS targets? Probably never because it isn't logical.

That's all I do when I fly CAS - look for the enemy helos. They're the biggest threat. And if I do happen to dive before the enemy CAS is down, I bet the first thing transmitted on the enemy's radio channels is akin to "ZOMG, enemy CAS spotted over E6kp4, come get them NAOW!"

Please remove the AA missiles.

PricelineNegotiator wrote:Exactly. How many times have you heard this?

"CAS, I have a laze for you."
"Not now, hunting enemy helos"
**15 minutes later**
"Ok, CAS is ready for your laze"

yeah in real militaries everyone knows that the CAS is always 60 seconds aways, fully fueled, fully armed, and not dealing with the enemy. Im not sure why it's inherently better that air vehicles should always be right on call.

This "Gameplay > realism" phrase is faulty, because realism = better gameplay often, and striving to achieve the best realism is to achieve the best balance. The phrase should, instead be worded "sacrificing realism due to inherent engine limitations for gameplay > realism". In this case, AAMs are not a game engine limitation.

Better to deal with the enemy air support and then help you so you don?t get a headache later, from above. And when the whole ground is filled with AA it helps to remove the above element which in some cases only another helicopter can reach.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Ohhh look who it is! WB Alex

Can?t play for another 4 months though. :/

I beg to differ. The ground isn't filled with AA, and besides, if you've got a decent spotter he will find out if there's AA in the area you're going to hit.

saXoni wrote:I beg to differ. The ground isn't filled with AA, and besides, if you've got a decent spotter he will find out if there's AA in the area you're going to hit.

The point is you can?t expect a helicopter to ignore its armed counterpart because they share the same domain. Whether they have the missiles or not, as a pilot you either have to deal with the other helicopter, or stay out of its way, and one has to decide whether is worth trying to get rid of the enemy helicopter for both you and your teams benefit, or whether is worth staying at base waiting for the other helicopter to be shot down, which make take a long time rendering your helicopter equally useless than if it were shot down.

I am not saying its what you should always do, go immediately hunting the other guy, but sometimes its a better idea.

Removing the missiles isn?t the answer, I don?t think it will significantly change anything because pilots will still want to keep each other down even if their helicopter only has sticks. The best solution is giving only one side cas helicopters.

Edit: Personally, I have had much more success in taking off, gaining altitude, carefully flying around until I get notified of the enemy helicopter or a cas command. If cas command comes, its a quick shot in and back to high altitude, if enemy helo is spotted, its swoop in and take it out, if none, then since nobody is asking for support, I will hunt the helicopter down and take him out of action. Now most say this is too dangerous and wasting an asset, but I disagree. Taking out the enemy helicopter is one of the most important things you can help your team with, and you are in a better position to so above the clouds and with a bit of thinking and practice you can make it so you come out winning the majority of times. Of course its not always certain, but you can certainly improve your odds.

Don?t get me wrong, I love helping the team more than anything else, but often they don?t communicate very well and taking the helo out will help them just as much as taking a tank out.

IMO choppers should egnage ground targets mainly. Attack enemy CAS heli only for self-defence or if you have good chance to kill it.

IN REAL LIFE HELICOPTERS DO NOT CARRY SIDEWINDER OR ANY OTHER AIR-AIR MISSILES.

And yes, those pictures of the Kiowa and Cobra, and no, they are not used like that operationally.

If you disagree, prove it. I can't be arsed to disprove it unfortunately, however I remember the arguments on the Eagle Dynamics forums regarding the issue, and firmly know that IR AAMs aren't used operationally in real life. The helicopters just make do with cannon and secondary capabilities of the AT missiles.